Our Endo ONLY looks at the Clarity data when having discussions with us. And she’s always telling us that we need to work on our severe low percentage. And as much as I would love to have a severe low percentage of 0.0%, this isn’t practical because that requires perfection in every sense, which no one is. In the past 3 years, the best I’ve managed to bring that severe low percentage down to has been .6%. I’m really struggling to get to .4% (according to the data uploaded into Clarity), because that data just is NOT accurate for us…
So what happens is that we go visit the Endo and I explain to her that the CGM isn’t accurate for us, we never “treat” based off of the number and really the value of the CGM for us is the trending that it provides. Yet, she has been constantly bringing this up to me in our visits.
So here is what I’ve decided to start doing. I am going to keep a log with the following data:
Fingerstick number (PDM data):
CGM number (CGM data):
What this will allow me to do is to BRING PROOF to her that the numbers are many times drastically different and, since she only looks at the CGM data, she’s believing we are low a lot more times than we are. I can provide her with the CGM data and the PDM data and tell her…“Look…here are all the dates/times that the CGM data wasn’t correct. The actual BG from a finger stick was…x while the CGM read y. This results in you believing we’re lower much more often than we actually are.”
I always go there and tell her this, but I don’t know if she believes it because she seems to just kind of nod and yeah yeah when I tell her this happens many times each day for us.
You guys think this would be valuable as a tool to have during our discussions?
It just sucks to already have enough issues with REAL lows, but also to have that Severe low percentage brought down even more with inaccurate readings with the CGM. I want her to understand that the data isn’t always as accurate for us as some of her patients may report.